Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

Before I write anything, Polyphonist, since you highlighted the chromatic descent in that section, would that affect how you play that passage? If so, are there particular things you would do with it?

Not really, but this is a rare case. It's important to be aware of it, since it will enhance your overall understanding of the section, and you may unconsciously reveal it to the listener as well. In the Chopin passage I posted, I would definitely bring out the inner line; it would be stupid not to.

Of course it's your opinion, and I don't question that it's well-informed. If you don't understand why I object to the word "stupid" in how that opinion is expressed, I'm not sure I can explain further.

[ETA: This has nothing to do with how I would choose to perform the piece -- I probably would accent those notes as well, now that you have pointed them out.

This way to try to explain occurs to me: by labelling things stupid, it can lead participants to feel that their contributions to the thread may also be labelled stupid. That has a chilling effect on conversation and learning and sharing.]

Before I write anything, Polyphonist, since you highlighted the chromatic descent in that section, would that affect how you play that passage? If so, are there particular things you would do with it?

Not really, but this is a rare case. It's important to be aware of it, since it will enhance your overall understanding of the section, and you may unconsciously reveal it to the listener as well. In the Chopin passage I posted, I would definitely bring out the inner line; it would be stupid not to.

How about the notes that I highlighted when first trying to answer your poorly-understood question? Would you bring any of those out?

Here is how I perceive that section, and I have to start before the part that you did:There is a dim7 thingy starting at m. 32 which goes down several octaves. It shifts to something else at measure 37. Here we have the figure: D#, C#, B# in m.37. It repeats in m. 38 - D#, C#, B# in m. 38. Then in m. 39 it changes to D, C#, B#. This is significant.

But you actually should look at the dim7 chord, because if it had continued, you would hit the D#, and you expect it to continue as D# , B#, A.... Instead the next note after D# is C# and that continual cascade down the diminished chord is stopped. The D# in m. 37 is still in pairs, but the C# that follows has broken that rhythm, and we start with triplets.

That is how I see it as a big picture, and that is what would guide part of my interpretation and "orientation to the big picture" if you will.

Of course it's your opinion, and I don't question that it's well-informed. If you don't understand why I object to the word "stupid" in how that opinion is expressed, I'm not sure I can explain further.

[ETA: This way to try to explain occurs to me: by labelling things stupid, it can lead participants to feel that their contributions to the thread may also be labelled stupid. That has a chilling effect on conversation and learning and sharing.]

I am not going to call anyone or anything stupid, for any reason, unless it is. (Being a beginner or not knowing something is not the same thing as being stupid.)

And calling a person stupid and an interpretation of something stupid are two vastly different things.

Before I write anything, Polyphonist, since you highlighted the chromatic descent in that section, would that affect how you play that passage? If so, are there particular things you would do with it?

Not really, but this is a rare case. It's important to be aware of it, since it will enhance your overall understanding of the section, and you may unconsciously reveal it to the listener as well. In the Chopin passage I posted, I would definitely bring out the inner line; it would be stupid not to.

How about the notes that I highlighted when first trying to answer your poorly-understood question? Would you bring any of those out?

Here is how I perceive that section, and I have to start before the part that you did:There is a dim7 thingy starting at m. 32 which goes down several octaves. It shifts to something else at measure 37. Here we have the figure: D#, C#, B# in m.37. It repeats in m. 38 - D#, C#, B# in m. 38. Then in m. 39 it changes to D, C#, B#. This is significant.

But you actually should look at the dim7 chord, because if it had continued, you would hit the D#, and you expect it to continue as D# , B#, A#.... Instead the next note after D# is C# and that continual cascade down the diminished chord is stopped. The D# in m. 37 is still in pairs, but the C# that follows has broken that rhythm, and we start with triplets.

That is how I see it as a big picture, and that is what would guide part of my interpretation and "orientation to the big picture" if you will.

Just a minute. It looks like there's plenty of substance to this post, but I don't have a score with me at the moment. I will look at it when I get home.

In my copy of the music which came free with my Casio piano, all the notes in question - those deserving emphasis - have the double stems - i.e. the up stems shared with the other triplets together with the "pick these notes out" down stems. Isn't this the case with other editions?

A quick apology for not participating (actually even keeping up with the posts) in the discussion of late. Particularly so, after rallying the troops to do so.

I'm delighted though to see the activity here and so many new folks contributing.

I will endeavor to get caught up soon, but have had engagements nearly every night this week (unexpected) and not letting up yet. Meanwhile, I'm reading when I am able to, and very interested in the discussion ... Thank you.

How about the notes that I highlighted when first trying to answer your poorly-understood question? Would you bring any of those out?

Here is how I perceive that section, and I have to start before the part that you did:There is a dim7 thingy starting at m. 32 which goes down several octaves. It shifts to something else at measure 37. Here we have the figure: D#, C#, B# in m.37. It repeats in m. 38 - D#, C#, B# in m. 38. Then in m. 39 it changes to D, C#, B#. This is significant.

But you actually should look at the dim7 chord, because if it had continued, you would hit the D#, and you expect it to continue as D# , B#, A.... Instead the next note after D# is C# and that continual cascade down the diminished chord is stopped. The D# in m. 37 is still in pairs, but the C# that follows has broken that rhythm, and we start with triplets.

That is how I see it as a big picture, and that is what would guide part of my interpretation and "orientation to the big picture" if you will.

This whole section is at least part of a loose development section. I'm not going to get into whether or not the first movement is sonata form, loose-sonata form, or something related to sonata form.

You have a series of diminished chords.

The first is B# D# F# A, the next Fx A# C# E, then back to the first. In between you have C#m/G#. But because G# is struck again and again, it serves as something of a pedal tone effect. And always B# D# F# A over the G# bass forms G#7b9, a very powerful dominant effect in the key of C# minor.

As Beethoven closes this section, he is still playing around with the B# D# F# A, still with the G# bass and forming G#7b9 right before he cadences to A then D#m7b5/F# OR F#m6 then G# G#7 and home.

All this makes a sense of hits own, but it is the D natural that I would accentuate greatly by echoing it, still bringing it out but softer, because all of as sudden for just a moment it gives you a D/G# sound, still the G# bass, but with a D chord, then moving to F#/G then back to the diminished or flat 9 chord.

To me that D chord and the D that is double stemmed shows things. First, all those double-stemmed notes are important and need to be heard clearly. Second, you have to do something with that D natural, because it is spectacularly yet subtly dissonant, and it sounds to me like a moan, or a sigh, or at least something very sad.

All this makes a sense of hits own, but it is the D natural that I would accentuate greatly by echoing it, still bringing it out but softer, because all of as sudden for just a moment it gives you a D/G# sound, still the G# bass, but with a D chord, then moving to F#/G then back to the diminished or flat 9 chord.

To me that D chord and the D that is double stemmed shows things. First, all those double-stemmed notes are important and need to be heard clearly. Second, you have to do something with that D natural, because it is spectacularly yet subtly dissonant, and it sounds to me like a moan, or a sigh, or at least something very sad.

Destroying the composer's intention is almost as bad as changing notes in my opinion.

Somewhat agree, but would like to ask. Why do we have to be true to the composer's intention?

Good question. Actually, these days I've got into to the habit of slipping in at least one maverick phrase per piece in order to try and frustrate YT's annoying habit of falsely detecting "matched third-party content".

I've started playing through this movement, and discover that physically interacting with the score and the music, even hesitantly, allows me to hear it better than just listening to a recording, even if I listen with the score. In the recording it all sounds seamless, but when I play it I can hear subtle changes happening in the harmony. I can't really hear the meaning of the changes, but I can tell he was doing one thing and then a few beats later he's shifted it a little bit.

This whole section is at least part of a loose development section. I'm not going to get into whether or not the first movement is sonata form, loose-sonata form, or something related to sonata form.

You have a series of diminished chords.

The first is B# D# F# A, the next Fx A# C# E, then back to the first. In between you have C#m/G#.

Yes. I used the silly wording "diminished thingy" because it stays diminished, even if which diminished chord is being played changes. Of course a diminished chord has an unsettled feeling - it wants to go somewhere - so this whole section has a sense of heightened tension. That is why when it finally settles down there is a feeling of relief, and right at that feeling of relief we also hear the refrain from the very beginning coming back.

Quote:

But because G# is struck again and again, it serves as something of a pedal tone effect. And always B# D# F# A over the G# bass forms G#7b9, a very powerful dominant effect in the key of C# minor.

Indeed, that repeated G# gives me a feeling of waiting for C# minor to come back.

Quote:

As Beethoven closes this section, he is still playing around with the B# D# F# A, still with the G# bass and forming G#7b9 right before he cadences to A then D#m7b5/F# OR F#m6 then G# G#7 and home.

The A is the point where I feel the tension let up. And the D natural and the shift in melody that is the harbinger of that change.

Polyphonist asked in terms of melody. One of the things for me is that during the spate of broken diminished chords there isn't a melody. Then suddenly the tail end of the last dim chord becomes a melody. That melody is repeated and then it changes and both the fact of a melody emerging, and the the change in the melody are powerful things. I cannot bring myself to only think of the notes D# D C# B# because to me there is more to it than just a chromatic descent.

To me that section starts at the diminished, because the diminished melts into that melody, and then the melody shape-shifts or changes its colour, all of it bringing us home.

Originally Posted By: Gary D.

All this makes a sense of hits own, but it is the D natural that I would accentuate greatly by echoing it, still bringing it out but softer...

Hm, both bring out a note, and softer --- I see a subtle lengthening or linger in bringing it out. (?)

Just a minute. It looks like there's plenty of substance to this post, but I don't have a score with me at the moment. I will look at it when I get home.

Still quite interested in what you will have to say. Your take was more on the melodic side and you brought out that one element, but of course there are so many things in an interplay. For myself I find that one insight will lead me to others.

I don't know how far you want to go with this but here's a fabulous feast of inner voices.

Godowsky is a genius, for sure. He made countless arrangements, transcriptions, and paraphrases, all of very high quality. One could even make the case that this particular one exceeds the original.

I was going to write what my favorite sections are, but now I realize I can't because I really like them all. I'll just give one example; the descending RH alto line from 1:40 to 1:46. Beautiful. And then that luscious Brahmsian setting of the return of the first section at 2:01.

I had just been reading over the thread and realized I'd never replied to that post, and since this thread has been dropped and revived many times in the past, I figured why not do it again and fire up some discussion.

Godowsky is a genius, for sure. He made countless arrangements, transcriptions, and paraphrases, all of very high quality. One could even make the case that this particular one exceeds the original.

I was going to write what my favorite sections are, but now I realize I can't because I really like them all. I'll just give one example; the descending RH alto line from 1:40 to 1:46. Beautiful. And then that luscious Brahmsian setting of the return of the first section at 2:01.

I also prefer this to the original. Whenever I listen to Kissin's performance I have to play it a few times - I canít imagine it being bettered. Those two passages in particular are perfect. After hearing it I spent several weeks a while back trying to play it. Hopeless - fingers and brain both knotted in the struggle to remember then maintain the staccato rhythms with the legato melodies. I donít have the technique but Iím going to have another go at this. If anyone is interested, to make it a little easier to focus on the legato Iíve modified the first two pages to highlight Kissinís countermelodies Ė Moment Musical for dummiesÖIf I can get through those Iíll finish the exercise.

... and since this thread has been dropped and revived many times in the past, I figured why not do it again and fire up some discussion.

Well I do intend to work on the 5th. by Liszt (Scherzo) and is a work I actually would prefer to work with a teacher on. Already I've caught stuff I didn't notice at first (thankfully before I memorized wrong) and was not playing right, and will be tricky to get nice.

Are you familiar with this work? I'm quite prepared to spend a long time on this one. Especially since you kindly pointed out I need to learn a whole extra movement

Actually, it looks like it gets a bit easier after page 4. Not sure. Also, haven't printed the last movement yet.